one anecdote: I was searching for a link to one of my old papers on Google, and the automated Gemini summary attributed all of my lab's work to my husband
Can creativity open up new ways of thinking about research?
This collaborative zine explores feminism, #openScience, and collective knowledge-making through reflection and making.
doi.org/10.17613/afd...
If you're a research leader managing multiple qualitative research projects, you'll need reliable suppliers who get things right, first time, and who understand what it takes to produce rigorous, internationally-impactful scholarship.
Learn more about us ⤵️
https://academicaudiotranscription.com
Thinking of the gross mischaracterisation that some public figures have been doing of the Suffragettes, one can imagine how teaching of history thru AI (for making it "more lively") will be sanitised by regimes & privileged groups to serve a narrative. Hell, they already do it for MLK.
Together with two colleagues I was rage baited by this as well so we wrote a reply (should be out soon in same venue that published the original): arxiv.org/abs/2606.12285
Join us for an online talk & discussion on extractivist dynamics in #OpenScience with Batool Almarzouq, @rosalbaicaza.bsky.social, and Ana Parrón Cabañero, chaired by yours truly.
Friday 19 June 2026, 15:00-16:15 CEST.
www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/events/20...
[email protected] bien subido al tren mamón del hype de IA. Un módulo es de "Qualitative Analysis and AI" (se ve que no leímos el artículo sobre xq no usar ia en cualitativo).
Xq? El mundo mayoritario de nuevo chupando bobadas neoliberales para sentirnos modernos 😭
www.clacso.org/en/escribir-...
Carta, no artículo:
doi.org/10.1177/1077...
Coleen Murphy
We need a massive grassroots push to introduce state-level legislation to institute meaningful consent & data protections frameworks for all things "AI" & technology, but especially every technological tool or system that touches health, education, or other sensitive/colloquially private information
When utilized in literature review, LLMs consistently 1. fail to mention female authors in female-led literatures, 2. insist that men are more influential or more heavily cited when this is contradicted by objective citation counts, and 3. attribute women’s work to hallucinated male scholars.
